Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29086188›Full record

ArticleJournal of cheminformatics2017

The comparison of automated clustering algorithms for resampling representative conformer ensembles with RMSD matrix.

Hyoungrae Kim, Cheongyun Jang, Dharmendra K Yadav, Mi-Hyun Kim

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of cheminformatics, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
13citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

13 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Computer-Aided Drug Design in Epigenetics.Frontiers in chemistry · 2018
    Review
  13. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

Hyoungrae KimDepartment of Data Management, KEIS, 56 Mullae-ro 20-gil, Yeongdeungpo-gu, Seoul, Republic of Korea. goddoes8@gmail.com.
Cheongyun JangDepartment of Pharmacy, College of Pharmacy, Yeonsu-gu, Incheon, Republic of Korea.
Dharmendra K YadavDepartment of Pharmacy, College of Pharmacy, Yeonsu-gu, Incheon, Republic of Korea.
Mi-Hyun KimDepartment of Pharmacy, College of Pharmacy, Yeonsu-gu, Incheon, Republic of Korea. kmh0515@gachon.ac.kr.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-2718-5637

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe accuracy of any 3D-QSAR, Pharmacophore and 3D-similarity based chemometric target fishing models are highly dependent on a reasonable sample of active conformations. Since a number of diverse conformational sampling algorithm exist, which exhaustively generate enough conformers, however model building methods relies on explicit number of common conformers.

resultsIn this work, we have attempted to make clustering algorithms, which could find reasonable number of representative conformer ensembles automatically with asymmetric dissimilarity matrix generated from openeye tool kit. RMSD was the important descriptor (variable) of each column of the N × N matrix considered as N variables describing the relationship (network) between the conformer (in a row) and the other N conformers. This approach used to evaluate the performance of the well-known clustering algorithms by comparison in terms of generating representative conformer ensembles and test them over different matrix transformation functions considering the stability. In the network, the representative conformer group could be resampled for four kinds of algorithms with implicit parameters. The directed dissimilarity matrix becomes the only input to the clustering algorithms.

conclusionsDunn index, Davies-Bouldin index, Eta-squared values and omega-squared values were used to evaluate the clustering algorithms with respect to the compactness and the explanatory power. The evaluation includes the reduction (abstraction) rate of the data, correlation between the sizes of the population and the samples, the computational complexity and the memory usage as well. Every algorithm could find representative conformers automatically without any user intervention, and they reduced the data to 14-19% of the original values within 1.13 s per sample at the most. The clustering methods are simple and practical as they are fast and do not ask for any explicit parameters. RCDTC presented the maximum Dunn and omega-squared values of the four algorithms in addition to consistent reduction rate between the population size and the sample size. The performance of the clustering algorithms was consistent over different transformation functions. Moreover, the clustering method can also be applied to molecular dynamics sampling simulation results.

Indexed as

3D shape-based alignmentConformer ensembleHierarchical clustering with dynamic tree cut (RCDT)k-Means clustering of multidimensional scaled RMSD values (RCKmeans)Linear kernel PCA (RCPCA)Nonlinear kernel PCA (RCPCA_RBF)

Identifiers

PMID29086188
PMCPMC5364127

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.